https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112238 Goods received under Rule 173H and re-dispatched after repacking were held not to satisfy the procedure for refund benefit because the assessee's D-3 intimation under Rule 173H could not be treated as compliance under Rule 173L. Since the prescribed procedural requirements for claiming the refund were not followed and duty was paid only later, the rejection of the refund claim was justified. The appeal therefore failed, with the matter decided in favour of the Revenue. en-us Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Apr 2012 12:41:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112238 Goods received under Rule 173H and re-dispatched after repacking were held not to satisfy the procedure for refund benefit because the assessee's D-3 intimation under Rule 173H could not be treated as compliance under Rule 173L. Since the prescribed procedural requirements for claiming the refund were not followed and duty was paid only later, the rejection of the refund claim was justified. The appeal therefore failed, with the matter decided in favour of the Revenue. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112238